Emily Kam Kngwarray #WomensArt #WomensCreativity

Emily Kam Kngwarray, Aboriginal artist and Anmatyerre elder #WomensArt #WomensCreativity

The SCORE Act is flawed because… It fails to require Title IX compliance, thus undermining federal and state laws that require equitable treatment of female athletes. Few institutions—especially low-resourced Division I schools—will have sufficient funds to support pay-for-play revenue sports, gender equity, and Olympic or other low-revenue-producing teams. Instead, they’re likely to prioritize revenue sports (football, men’s basketball). It gives the NCAA almost total control of college athletics in perpetuity in return for college athletes giving up employee rights, receiving limited economic benefits, and getting insufficient health, athletic injury, transfer rights, and other protections. It establishes a pay-for-play college sports system that will result in academic institutions treating players as expendable employees as opposed to students seeking educational degrees. If their playing performance falters, cash payments will not be renewed if more talented prospects are available in the transfer portal. The College Athletics Reform Act (CARA) is a better alternative because… It addresses the most pressing athlete protection issues in college sports: the regulation of sports agents, the assurance of athletes’ NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) rights, and an enforcement system more likely to protect all athletes, including women, rather than the commercial interests of a few. It provides a blueprint for moving forward with a bipartisan Congressional Commission that will have the time and information needed to develop solutions to those issues that have created the current legislative stalemate. It will allow Democrats and Republicans to address what all can agree to now in the spirit of nonpartisan support and then move forward together over the next two years, assisted by experts who understand the complex issues involved, so that college sports will better serve our athletes and higher education institutions.

Call to Action: SCORE Act Undermines Female Athletes and Title IX

Make one call to Congress to speak up for women athletes -- and pass it along

These testimonies of surrogate mothers are truly cautionary tales! In Paris, France, and Brighton, UK, women committed to fighting violence against women listened attentively and empathetically to the testimonies of former surrogate mothers. Both conferences concluded with a standing ovation, reflecting a firm and collective commitment to protecting all women from surrogacy. Yes, surrogacy must be abolished everywhere in the world.

Surrogacy: Hear The Voices Of Those On The Frontline - Coalition for the Abolition of Surrogate Motherhood

When it comes to surrogacy, the so-called ‘intended parents’ take centre stage. The women who give birth to the children are either sil...

Now here's a guest post, by Ian David, on Jennifer Bilek's Substack guaranteed to give most of us the creeps... This is why the ‘culture war’ isn’t really about culture anymore. It’s become a stress test on every human boundary - biological, symbolic, reproductive, and economic. All these fronts are now interconnected, each one flowing into the others through feedback loops no one has charted and no one realistically could. Nothing happens in isolation anymore. Meanwhile - and this is where most gender-critical discourse seems fatally behind the curve - the categories they claim to be fighting so hard to defend are being liquefied in real time. CRISPR-derived gametes, uterine transplants, brain-organoid puberty models, LLM-driven identity simulators, neurofeedback ‘gender journey’ apps. None of this is sci-fi; all of it is funded, peer-reviewed, and accelerating. Ignore the techno-science layer - Haraway, Plant, Preciado, even Firestone, plus the whole xenofeminist/biohacking stack -, and you cede the actual battlefield to those explicitly aligned with queer/trans ontology. You can yell at clouds all you like, but the real struggle over bodies, data, and reproductive futures is happening in clean rooms and server farms. Almost nobody is talking about that. Which is why Cass and the puberty-blocker trials it gave birth to should be seen as mere skirmishes. The real contest - over who defines the next iteration of the human - is unfolding upstream, in biotechnology, computation, and the philosophical frameworks that legitimise them. Treating brief moments as equilibrium-restoring ‘wins’ is precisely how you get blindsided.

Emerging From the Ooze: Sex Identities Driven by Capital and Technology

by Ian David

This piece is very, very good. Here are my favorite tidbits, but there are other excellent points as well. Before you make any remarks about radical feminism, you need to actually read radical feminist literature. Not Instagram infographics. Not reels. Not “threads.” Actual books, essays, texts. You can’t critique something you haven’t read. (Well, you can, but then you’re just shouting garbage into the void.) Us women need to do better at disagreeing with each other and critiquing each other. I don’t believe in a blind sisterhood in the sense that if a woman is doing harmful, anti-woman things, I’ll let it slide because she’s a woman. BUT what I won’t do is go feral on her, publicly shame, attack, or immediately ascribe malice to her; what I will do is talk to her, explain why she’s wrong, disagree, even critique, but I won’t go down the route of being downright fucking nasty. Andrea Dworkin’s "Right-Wing Women" is a perfect example of this. Although she heavily critiques right-wing women, and there’s a lot to critique, because right-wing women have done some really fucked up shit, which hurts more because they’re women, Andrea tactfully, empathically, assertively and passionately critiques and analyses them. She doesn’t resort to insults, slurs, or shaming, nor does she go easy on them or try to diminish the harm they cause. She shows them “love” in a way, tough love. We can do the same. And let’s direct some of the aggressive-ass smoke we spew towards women towards the men who actually hurt us. When you start ascribing arbitrary things like clothing, cosmetics, personality, hobbies, hairstyles, names, and appearance to a specific “gender” or “sex”, you are doing sooo much damage. It is straight-up sexism and misogyny. To suggest that being a woman or man is anything other than XX and XY, larger gametes, smaller gametes, is insanity. A female is still a woman if she doesn’t have breasts, a uterus, or has short hair, facial hair, you misogynistic prick. We need to abolish gender.

The Boogeyman of Feminism: Radical Feminism

What radical feminism has taught me (so far)